I skimmed your article but I don't see any "sound evidence" proposed in the article either.

The line between "conspiracy theory" and "a theoretically possible hypothesis that can neither be proven nor ruled out" is kind of murky for me, but if you are claiming "there are sound evidence that COVID comes from a lab leak", then you cannot support your argument by only citing "space for reasonable doubts" (which is what your article said).

I didn't say it was "sound evidence", I just said it's not a conspiracy theory..? (If it's not clear, I'm not the OP - maybe try skimming less)

It's likely true but it's still a conspiracy theory because it involves multiple parties conspiring in secret.